D&D 4E 4e - Is it really D&D Yet?

[eleran]

Ok, I'll bite. I looked at the abilities in the Warlord article that was posted recently. I could understand them. But on some level they simply did not compute. I couldn't see (in my head) what the effect was supposed to look like. In some sense, it was like reading a foreign language.

Now, could I learn that language and adapt to it? Sure. Just like when I abandoned 2E for 3E -- which in my opinon, was such a huge leap that I really consider 3E to be a separate game. I was more than ready to switch, and I spent a year of my life getting myself into the groove of the new game ahead of time so I would be ready for it.

I can totally see someone having the experience I had with the warlord powers and saying, "That's not D&D." It's not pushing the same mental buttons, it's not tickling the same spots in my brain.

OK, I can accept that. Thanks for the explanation. I don't see it the same way, but that's ok too. Now I know where you're coming form.

 

[eleran]

I suppose it depends on where you focused.

There is no "platonic form" of DnD out there to be found (though many seem to think there are). To me, there are three elements to a DnD setting 1) Dungeons!, 2) Dragons!, 3) a group of classes which MUST include a) fighter, b) rogue/thief c) wizard d) cleric.

d20s and proficiencies, skills, feats, Thac0, even (dare i say) AC and HPs are all about the <i>how</i> not the <i>what</i>!

If you want to talk about differing visions of DnD, we've always had those. There has always been the Monty Haul v. RPer v. Tactician v. Teen Fantasy splits -- now we've added the ability to make anime characters. (which is I think the big split from older editions, since the mechanics and the functioning of talents and feats don't match the game *I* play every sunday night (WoW)).

Although it would be awesome if every talent in WoW gave me a unique power, and if they had enough powers that no two characters in the same guild were identical (they don't, and every class has only two or three usable paths, the rest being sub-optimal are scrapped)

But now I ramble.

Anyway -- it may not be Your DnD, it may not even be MY DnD, but it will soon be an option that is there, a game to play if you decide to give it a go. For what it's worth, there hasn't been anything I've seen that would break my campaign lines.. sure wizards are different, and fighters are almost as cool as wizards now -- do we really need to tell half the gaming table that they're just not as cool as the other half past level 5?

-Adam

Thanks Adam. Nice explanation.

Who knew I was so anime? I have only seen one anime flick in my life (Legend of the Lodoss War i think) and I wasn't all that impressed.

This is one of the best threads on EN right now.

Anyone else notice things have slowed to almost a crawl around here?

 

[Foundry of Decay]

Heya! And welcome to the boards.

You've tripped into a stort of 'testy' area with some folks since there have been months of arguments both here and abroad between people wanting to defend their editions. Don't let any of that drive you away though!

As to the main question: 4e - Is it really D&D Yet?

This will greatly vary on whom you ask. To me it's just as D&D as any other edition. There actually isn't really a right or wrong answer. Based on what you have written about your experiences, this might not seem like D&D to you, and that's just fine.

However I will point out a couple things that I'm finding a lot of people seem to forget about from what they've seen/played in the D&D Experience:

1) The characters are all pre-made. Nobody but the playtesters and the developers know just how many various 'powers' that characters get. Its widely known that a fighter using a 2-handed hammer is going to have different abilites than one using a sword and board.

2) Feats. Again, we know very little about the impact of, and the variances of feats. From the pre-mades its hard to judge just what you can get to modify and individualize a character or differentiate them from anyone else.

3) Static Games. The Delves and LFR were all pretty much static games to give people an idea of the system. Writing your own adventures and campaigns will make this vary wildly from what has been seen in the DDXP.

This isn't to say that the 3.5 system was some miserable kluge of rules that deserves to have bad fruit and toasters thrown at it. I've enjoyed what I could do with 3.5 quite a bit up to a certain point. It still is D&D to me even when I'll be making the switch to 4e.

4e certainly isn't dumbed down for children I'll add. Going by that logic we'd have to say that any system not using the archaic rules such as THAC0 and variable saves and charts and more charts and *scream* more charts! Charts everywhere..

..er..

Well, we'd have to say that 3e was pretty dumbed down as well, considering it simplified a lot of the 'having to look through the books for everything' syndrome that was inherent in 1/2e.

Again, you are free to play what you wish. If you've found the system that works for you, that's great! Go mad, have fun!

 

[EricNoah]

Anyone else notice things have slowed to almost a crawl around here?

The server doesn't like friendy, civil discussions.

 

[Beerwolf]

Thanks for the feedback - All

Hello all.

I justed wanted to say thanks for the feedback from lots of you that gave me feedback and didn't attack me. I posted here, after learning about this site at DnDXP in Washington DC because people said I should share my opinion and see why other people "liked" or "didn't" like 4e.

I appreciate those that were constructive. I wanted to see why people liked 4e.

I do have to say I was very disappointed I was accused of being an old poster, because those were my opinoins only after the play test.

Thanks to those that offered constructive criticism. I feel more comfortable posting now.

 

[eleran]

The server doesn't like friendy, civil discussions.

Is that it? Hmmmm.... what a stupid thing to say!!?!?!?! I keed I keed

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And that's all fine and dandy. But, WHY isn't it D&D to you? I am asking because I have a fascination with things like this that make shared experiences effect different people differently. Probably why I got a degree in Anthropology.

Obviously we all like D&D to some extent to come on here and prattle away about during a workday (or maybe thats just me), and I have tried 4e with the so-far-released materials and it feels liek D&D to me. Maybe newer shinier D&D, but thats to be expected I think.

No problem, I can attempt to explain further - For me, D&D has always been kind of "nastier" than the game 4E is with it's clear-cut roles, it's healing surges, it's huge HP at level one, and so on and so forth. That's the main, primary thing. Also, the distinction between players and NPCs/monsters being so clear-cut, and the whole thing being very clearly and admittedly "GAME FIRST!" as opposed to containing wierd simulationist shiz? That's not very D&D-ish.

I didn't say the things that made it D&D were necessarily good things, note, but there they are. To me, D&D was always a vaguely simulationist game (of a particular self-created genre of high fantasy/S&S) with slightly primitive rules that happened to be a huge amount of fun.

I also think chucking Vancian magic, whilst I approve heartily of it, contributed it to not being D&D to me. Alignment, on the other hand, meant nothing to me, nor, for example, did the "Great Wheel" (even as a Planescape fan, Sigil was the cool bit, the bit that mattered). Changing the monsters, or PC races, or setting in no way detracts from the "D&D-ness". Changing the basic focus of the game from "confused simulationist with gamist elements" to "absolutely pure 100% gamist" (possibly the most gamist thing I've ever seen voluntarily describe itself as an RPG, in fact).

Maybe not being D&D can be a good thing? Or is that Exterminatus-worthy heresy? Just to be clear, I thought the introduction of more clear/intentional/heavy (however you want to put it) "gamist" elements in 3E did push it further from being "D&D", but it was still fairly close. AoOs and reach will never be "D&D" for me.

Edit - Also the Bo9S wasn't very D&D for me, because D&D has descriptive names for things, not stylized wierdo names for things, by and large, and Bo9S, and by extension, elements of 4E, are all about the stylized quasi-Asian "something I shouted whilst playing Feng Shui"-type names. Certainly the Warlord is, which makes precisely zero sense given his apparent role and background but w/e he sounds fun to play.

 

[Dragonblade]

I have a feeling he means the player tracks spell durations in relation to initiative in order to make sure spells last the right amount of time.

In 4e the save mechanic actually acts as a timer when a spell effect does not have a set duration (and so far none of the targeted ones do).

Indeed. He does track initiative, but when you have 6 PCs and several monsters, he likes to have backup to make sure no one gets skipped.

And for spell durations, we use a white board. We list out all active PC buffs, which affects overlap with what, their duration, and then if a monster is afflicted with a player cast spell we jot down that spell and that duration too.

The DM still tracks monster buffs and durations behind screen. And God forbid someone casts Greater Dispel and we have to sort out whats gone, how that affects everyone's bonuses and durations and so on.

It really is a mess. Will 4e solve all this? I don't know yet. But everything I have seen, and my own playtest experience seems to indicate a big yes.

Now, I admit there is a part of me that enjoys this aspect of 3.5. All the crazy buffs and the interplay between buffs and durations and dispelling. This is the simulation aspect that I think some people will miss with 4e. This small part of me is the same part of me that will probably lead me to buying Pathfinder when it comes out.

But the rest of me has had enough of this. Especially as a DM. I want something faster and easier. I want lots of tactical options but less in-game bookkeeping. For me, it looks like 4e delivers the goods.

And D&D feel for me, is simple. Its a party of adventurers going on a quest. Its rolling a d20 to hit. Its wizards with wands, and fighters with +X swords. Its playing in a fantasy world with Tolkien-esque races. It delving into dungeons and dealing with traps and monsters and getting magical treasure. That's D&D for me. And based on my criteria, 4e is for me just as much D&D as 1e, 2e, and 3e are.

 

[eleran]

Indeed. He does track initiative, but when you have 6 PCs and several monsters, he likes to have backup to make sure no one gets skipped.

And for spell durations, we use a white board. We list out all active PC buffs, which affects overlap with what, their duration, and then if a monster is afflicted with a player cast spell we jot down that spell and that duration too.

The DM still tracks monster buffs and durations behind screen. And God forbid someone casts Greater Dispel and we have to sort out whats gone, how that affects everyone's bonuses and durations and so on.

It really is a mess. Will 4e solve all this? I don't know yet. But everything I have seen, and my own playtest experience seems to indicate a big yes.

Now, I admit there is a part of me that enjoys this aspect of 3.5. All the crazy buffs and the interplay between buffs and durations and dispelling. This is the simulation aspect that I think some people will miss with 4e. This small part of me is the same part of me that will probably lead me to buying Pathfinder when it comes out.

But the rest of me has had enough of this. Especially as a DM. I want something faster and easier. I want lots of tactical options but less in-game bookkeeping. For me, it looks like 4e delivers the goods.

And D&D feel for me, is simple. Its a party of adventurers going on a quest. Its rolling a d20 to hit. Its wizards with wands, and fighters with +X swords. Its playing in a fantasy world with Tolkien-esque races. It delving into dungeons and dealing with traps and monsters and getting magical treasure. That's D&D for me. And based on my criteria, 4e is for me just as much D&D as 1e, 2e, and 3e are.

This

 

[Howndawg]

Frankly, I don't care if 4e feels like D&D or not. What I care about is whether it is good. All the name D&D means to me is that I can easily buy stuff for it and easily find players for it. That and the blissful nostalgic memories I get when I think about when my dwarf fighter killed my friend's human fighter and took his treasure in my first game .